May 05, 2013

Without religion, I enjoy feeling normal and not special

Recently I experienced an insignificant moment on an airplane which reminded me of how, when I was religious, experiences like this took on a wildly undeserved meaning.

The flight attendants were coming down the aisle on their last beverage service before the plane landed. Sitting way in the back, I could hear repeatedly, "Would you like a complimentary Mai Tai?"

I started to think about what I'd say when the two women got to my aisle.

I've probably only had a couple of Mai Tai's in my life. In fact, likely I've consumed less than a dozen alcoholic mixed drinks in my 64 years of living.

From the age of 20 until I was in my mid-50's, I didn't drink a drop of alcohol. Not even wine or beer. I was devoted to a system of meditation that required from its practitioners total abstinence from alcohol and mind-altering drugs.

For that and other reasons, I felt really special in my true believing days.

Of course, like most religious people I tried to hide my attitude of Me, Me, Me behind a veneer of Thee, Thee, Thee -- submission to the will of my guru and God (who were tightly connected, since the guru was considered to be God in Human Form, a lot like Jesus is viewed by Christians).

In truth, though, I'd come to see my life as akin to what was noted in the above-linked post: a Technicolor production in a black-and-white world.

My vivdness arose out of a belief that I was on a fast track to spiritual and mystical understandings which most people in the world would never be privvy to, because I was a "chosen person" and they weren't (amazing how so many religions consider a particular faith, and that faith alone, to be the special beloved of God.)

So, for example, I'd stand in a theatre ticket line, observing my fellow movie-goers, and think, while repeating the oh-so-special mantra the guru had given me when I was initiated in 1971, "I am destined for divine heights these other people will never reach; I'm so fortunate."

It felt good to feel so special. Yet, looking back, it also was a burden. Many little things of life became gigantic moral challenges.

I was such a strict vegetarian, I didn't want to eat even a speck of meat, fish, or egg. I read the details of every food label to make sure that something like Worchester sauce wasn't in it, because the sauce contains anchovies.

If some of my dining companions were ordering wine with dinner, I'd decline even a taste. After all, commandments must be followed. God in Human Form, my guru, had told me not to drink a drop of any alcoholic drink.

Now I see things much differently. There are indeed good reasons for not drinking alcohol. Feeling that by remaining abstinent you are strenthtening your special relationship with God isn't one of them.

Eventually I tired of my supposed special-ness. I yearned for normalcy. I wanted to feel like I was no better and no worse than anyone else, just another human being living my human life. I make my choices about what to do; other people make theirs. We're all going along trying to do the best we can.

Deciding whether to drink a free Mai Tai no longer is an episode in a morality play for me. As the flight attendants came closer, I wondered whether I'd like the taste of it, and if one drink of an unfamiliar alocholic concoction would affect my driving after I picked up a rental car.

"Complimentary Mai Tai?" The flight attendant looked at me.

"Sure," I said. She turned to the guy in the center seat. "Sure," he told her. I liked how he used the same word I did. I'd only exchanged a few words with him during the flight. But now we were Mai Tai buddies, two normal guys enjoying a free drink.

I'm still a strict vegetarian. I rarely consume more alcohol than a nightly glass of red wine. I meditate every morning. Difference is now, I don't feel like I'm doing anything special, or that I'm anybody special for doing these things.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"I wanted to feel like I was no better and no worse than anyone else, just another human being living my human life."

That's a tall order...perhaps not even possible. As long as you have values and expectations, you identify with them and can't help but distinguish yourself from others on that basis. You have your own morality, for instance, and when you meet others whose morality is more or less stringent than yours, unless you're a meta-ethical moral relativist, the comparison amounts to judgment.

Thank you so much for this post with so much honesty. You have no idea how much I appreciate your candor. When I divorced my RS hubby I was demonized for leaving him, not only by the oh so special RS followers, but by the nonRS friends and family who had no idea what it's like to be married to someone who thinks they are so special while oozing false modesty. By the end, he turned my stomach. Thanks for expressing a revelation that I'm sure he'll never come to.

Once he found a tiny piece of meat that somehow found it's way into a pasta dish he'd been eating at a restaurant. He promptly escaped to the restroom to vomit. He also used to lie to wait staff at restaurants saying he was violenly allergic to eggs to make them ensure there were no traces of egg in his food. I felt sorry for them and myself. I witnessed how the lie seemed so easy for him. Would he lie to me as easily in service of his beliefs I'd wonder. Did he?

Yes. So the real issue perhaps is not what you think but how much weight you give it i.e. whether you believe your thoughts. Man is conditioned to assume certain thoughts are meaningful - perhaps that's even what conditioning 'means'? Without that belief thoughts can be merely incidental.

Reading your insights is refreshing. I suspect this took a good bit of living to gain the perspective that you wanted to be no better than your fellow man. Needs and ego are hard things to work through. I have been watching fundamentalist people of various belief systems growing older and the mellowing out in some is wonderful. Meanwhile the hardening in others is sad and almost scary. Thanks for the post -- I found you via Time Goes By.

... don't need to attribute the last parking space to the Guru. But, but, but ... I have to admit, at some level, feeling " special " made me feel good. It was like a placebo, a condidtioned high. Normal can be boring, but you only need a good mascarpone and orange tart with some chilled white wine to feel really, really special. Damn, the eggless-ness of my RS days drove me crazy ... Now I wonder, whether it is just good to live in delusion, or sip some bitter-sweet reality.

Hmmm ... I'll settle for the latter, reluctantly. I do tend to miss a sense of God. What do you do when you feel really low ?

"I have to admit, at some level, feeling " special " made me feel good."

It makes you feel good because it's true; you are special. Each one of us is a special case. We're all the same in so much as we're dealing with facts that we're trying to square with our fictions and theories, but we're all different, "special", in the ways we do it.

Great post Brian. It made me smile. Last night at a pub a friend said to me "you haven't lived until you have had a stiff drink"....On the contrary you have lived an amazing life without having to indulge in alcohol too much. I am sure you look back and marvel at this journey of self discovery you have had and are still on....To infinity and beyond....
I must ask....what has made you keep the vegetarian diet? Have you ever tried meat after your R.S. days or have been tempted?
Also...if you don't mind my asking....what style of meditation do you practice these days and how long do you devote to it?
Lastly...I recall many moons you ago you mentioning to me that you took up skateboarding....I am thinking of buying a RipStick skateboard....ever played on one of those?

Hmmm ... I'll settle for the latter, reluctantly. I do tend to miss a sense of God. What do you do when you feel really low ?

I think of Faqir Chand, good things happen to good humans. Don't accept the RS karmic rationale, you can achieve anything, thought has a lot of power. If you think positive, be a good human, you will achieve good things.

the9thGate, no, I've never tried meat. Not for about 65 years. Never felt an urge to do so. If I was starving, probably I'd change my mind.

I don't really have a meditation style. Well, sort of I do. I mainly follow my breathing, ala Buddhism 101. Sometimes I count breaths on exhale. Sometimes I don't.

I'll combine a simple mantra with breathing, or sometimes just follow the mantra. Sometimes I don't do anything except be aware of whatever I'm sensing at the moment, both inside and outside of me.

Yes, I've become addicted to landpaddling on my longboards. My other blog has a "skateboarding" category where I have some posts and videos.

It's great aerobic and core exercise. I go 5 to 7 miles on a typical land paddling excursion on a local rural park with asphalt trails. The RipStick looks weird, but fun. Also seems like good exercise, though probably more limited than a longboard on where you can go with it.

And just two wheels... hmmmmmm. Seems tricky to learn. The RipStick apparently is propelled by the same motion as longboard "pumping," converting side to side motion into forward motion. I'm trying to learn how to do this, with moderate success so far.

Thank you Brian for replying. I like your ideas on meditation. Just being aware of your breathing sounds like something I should try. I have not sat down to meditate in years....afraid I might start reciting the 5 Shabd's instinctively and staring into darkness, waiting for something to happen....I need a shift or perspective.
I saw this young man going uphill with a RipStick and the motion on the board was amazing to behold. The fluidity of the movement, almost fish like.....and going uphill just looked like a workout. Time to start saving up.
Land paddling on asphalt trails sounds like bliss. I have to ask....is your board customised? I am already day dreaming about customising a board,,,paint job, logo, the works....One day I want to own a hover board like in Back to The Future II....if only eh?

Can you exist as a reasoning, functioning, communicating being without thoughts, Tom? Are you not conditioned? Would you have the reader believe that you are "beyond thought" or some such nonsense?

cc, as it happens I do have a lot of thoughts. But there is also a sense of proportion that says 'these are just thoughts'. I can play with them but they don't take me over. Isn't this the kind of realisation Brian is pointing to?

You can certainly regard conditioning as the mere presence of certain thoughts and reactions, but I'm asking if that is a relevant definition. The heavier and more pernicious layer of conditioning is the belief that these thoughts (or certain special ones) are TRUE, or even significant in any way. That's where it seems to me the possibility for transformation lies.

It's better not to have any thoughts at all if they're not subject to review. A reasonable mind always questions its own thoughts, so when you speak of enlightenment, I wonder what you're talking about.

It's better not to have any thoughts at all if they're not subject to review. A reasonable mind always questions its own thoughts, so when you speak of enlightenment, I wonder what you're talking about.

Thought isn't, for me, something I can switch on and off. I can try, and it works for a while, but it's a bit like holding your breath - you can't do it forever. But troublesome thoughts do start to subside when they are seen with detachment, as objects that can be reviewed (using your word) without the visceral quality of belief. So the process of detaching is one of losing belief. But for a while, maybe quite a while, these thoughts still trigger some residual interest and have to be seen and allowed to pass through.

Now it's easier to do this when the 'belief' has failed through some crisis test. It reaches a point of extreme tension and then snaps entirely. It's much harder when the belief (or we could use the term commitment or dependency) is accompanied only by a dull ache, in which case it can hang around forever, slowly wearing you down. And I think the greatest problem for humanity lies in such dull aches, the ones with apparently unquestionable credentials.

This is why an urge to subjective order or 'enlightenment' is helpful - you become sensitive to the slightest hint of trouble. The only 'faith' that is required is the faith that it doesn't have to be so. There is a way to resolve existential pain, whether the full blown variety or just a persistent ache or doubt.

The way I've put it seems to correspond with the buddhist view of enlightenment as the end of suffering. That'll do for me.

The article includes text of the author's candid interview with Mary Johnson, a former nun with Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity. Although the whole article is worth reading, I thought the following excerpts were particularly relevant to this blog post:

"Unquestioning faith enables the system to continue undisturbed. Official theology often serves politics."

"............... a member of the faithful is taught that reason must be subjugated to belief."

"I've learned that every question is worth asking, even when answers elude us. I've learned that the stories we tell can help us live more firmly in reality or they can create an alternate reality that causes us to relate to the world in a distorted way. When I allowed myself to question the stories that I’d been told, I could finally begin to live in the real world, and I can’t tell you how liberating that felt, how freeing, how wonderful. Faith teaches you all the answers; it doesn't tell you that those answers may be wrong. I prefer to live with the questions, and with stories that mirror the world as I experience it rather than as I’d like it to be."

"The way I've put it seems to correspond with the buddhist view of enlightenment as the end of suffering. That'll do for me."

Okay, enlightenment is "the end of suffering". What, then, is "suffering"? Define it, please, so the reader can be clear about just what it is that distinguishes the enligtened human from the unenlightened.

"The Buddha acknowledged that there is both happiness and sorrow in the world, but he taught that even when we have some kind of happiness, it is not permanent; it is subject to change. And due to this unstable, impermanent nature of all things, everything we experience is said to have the quality of duhkha or unsatisfactoriness. Therefore unless we can gain insight into that truth, and understand what is really able to provide lasting happiness, and what is unable to provide happiness, the experience of dissatisfaction will persist."

This is really no help at all to the suffering human that doesn't enjoy the absurdity of the last scene in Some Like It Hot.

Due to highly unusual circumstances which I cannot tell you, I have decided to
reveal to the mass public the initiations of Radhasoami Beas and Kirpal groups. Also
Agra. About 300 new people every day
will see the initiation on the front pages of the below websites. This is my response to Gurinder and Rajinder moles.

Anger anger Mike is your burden you don't recognize your friend anymore. Why are you beating such a war in you, i tell you Mike from the outer world that people don't bother what you write and what infos are you putting out people live their lives and they will not remember you, that is the truth Mike.
Mike i wish you very best with your life from my deepest of my heart and you deserve peace but you will have to establish it with your self.Mike go out and embrace the sun and do few body exercises and live your life find that peace in just enjoying the fresh air and the sun , Mike find that peace soon, Mike you will awake little real Mike in you and you will be forever grateful to yourself that you embraced this idea, Mike i love you and live your life like a happy ruff neck beautiful man, i see you like this, PEACE

Brian, nice post, it’s so true about feeling “normal” and not feeling special in the arrogant sense. Following a religion/path is much easier for me when I can wear it lightly, in the sense of being able to take it or leave it on any given day without any guilt and not being sensitive or reactive to criticism or judgment. Heck, criticize everything I stand for, maybe I’ll get over my ”special” self sooner rather than later. Finding lasting peace and happiness would be awesome! I’ve found it so many times in my life, but, it’s never been permanent. I’ve had some good runs, only to be shattered by life’s tragedies and struggles. Humbled that I’m not this “special” guy with “special” powers that can pull me and you into infinite bliss at will. Climbing back onto another good wave, it’s a great ride, wonder how far and long this one will take me.

Mike Williams
your "ideas" sound great. what you are writing reminds me on sant mat spiritual teaching in which I took part for some time last year. However, enthusiastic in the beginning, but soon very deluded about the so called "science of the soul". I am still in search for the Truth (like most of us here), but don't need religious dogma and suppression/controlling of my mind and thoughts.
Your words sound as if you are knowing more than me. So if possible, please could you share your insight/knowledge/awareness.
Anyway, since my active English is not very developed, I cannot express myself like I wanted to - but slow going I am able to understand whatsoever I am reading.

Mike Williams, thank you for answering.
I must admit that I had to check up what actually is the proper meaning of "agnosticism", which I didn't know exactly.
"Agnosticism is the position that the existence and nature of a god is unknown or unknowable. It's intellectually indefensible to make a strong assertion one way or another. Agnostics believe that while there is insufficient evidence to prove that there is a god, believing that there is not a god also requires a leap of faith (similar to any religious conviction) that lacks sufficient evidence. Simply put, agnosticism merely asserts that we lack the knowledge to determine whether or not God exists."
So that means that you do not rule out the possibility that there is a god/creator/higher conciousness. The fact that YOU didn't find IT doesn't bring you to the conclusion, that there is no god at all. You are just saying that there is not enough evidence for stating the existence of god. And that humans are not capable to realize, to experience, to acquire that knowlegde. They can only speculate, believe this or that, whatsoever. Right?
And out of the fear of death they create a god for themselves, a “proxy god”, a god that promises everlasting life in a better world.

I agree so far.

“It seems this was an unconscious creation
that became conscious as an after effect.”

This is a new approach.

Fact is, that the whole thing/the universe DOES WORK (more or less) PERFECTLY. So I am asking if this could be an unconscious creation? For me it is rather looking like a very well done work. It is in function, like an intentional plan.
So, it may be that the so called god/ the cause/ the reason/ the principle behind all this is not a loving god, but just a god and IT IS LIKE IT IS. Regardless of whether good or bad, paradise or hell, it just doesn’t matter, all the same, seen from the large/main perspective. The “earth as a slaughter house” could be just a side effect because of the – maybe unintended developing/advancement of the human brain (?)

Side note: I personally I am enjoying the NOT KNOWING. Imagine that we are all-knowing-beings. There would be no sense for living any more.
I like speculating how i t could be. I like to think. I like to use my intellect. That’s one of the main reasons why I quitted the sant mat teachings, because they asked me not to think any more, they asked me to leave my ego. They said my mind is part of the negative power. Idiocy.

"I never lose my sense of wonder at the sheer unlikelihood of having briefly 'made it' on a planet where cruel extinction has held such sway, and where the chance of being conceived let alone safely delivered is so infinitesimal."

Mike W. and Elizabeth W,
thx, you give me new points of view to think about.
This is the unestimable beauty of the human brains: they produce different views. and the capability to communicate among each other.

I think I have to read some of Nietzsche's ideas and those of Richard Dawkins.

Mike, regarding the yt-video: it's a bit difficult to understand, the sound quality is not good, but I’ll try my best ...

Leaving out the specific cruelty of the human beings (killing each other without reason) -
I am just trying to imagine a created universe where there is no death, no killing, no birth or re-birth, no old, no young, no time which passes by, no fugacity. Wouldn’t it result in a non-altering world, where everything remains in its primary, initial state? No changes, everything is lasting forever ... could this be the eternal felicity and bliss?

"God" 'exists' (for the sake of relative communication) but cannot be found or known in any relative sort of way because God is not in any relative sort of way.

If we think that God is neither conceivable nor demonstrable in terms of time and space, and the humans though are limited on these perceptions, how could we ever succeed in experiencing God?
We can't.

"Yoga assumes we can help God by practice.
But, does God need any help ? When we practice yoga,
do we not insult God ?"

I think it should be reversed - God to help us. If God /ore Something Else-God/ wanted us to experience him/her/it, he would come (down) to human's comprehensible dimensions.

And here is my knowledge of a small part of God's evidence:

I don't think that everything happened/happens coincidentally. The universe, the nature works so perfectly that it seems to be designed, originally, or at least partially.

Observing nature we can see how IT works. When I put a grain in the soil - a plant is going to grow out of this little grain. This energy I describe as God, how he/it works. It shows me the existence of God. So, for me there is no need for meditation, no need for a person who claims to be GIHF, because I see God "live".

Yes, you are right, either we can’t experience God, or everything we experience is God.
These opposite possibilities arise maybe due to our perception of duality (?)
We can only imagine that there is something or there is not.
Nothing in between or beyond.

Assuming that we can’t experience God does not exclude God’s being.

In principle it is indifferent how we call IT.
Fact is, that there IS something in existence, because we are in existence.
I don’t think that everything in our world is an illusion of our mind (Maya) as the Indian philosophy says. Even supposing that everything is illusion, requires the existence of something that produces the illusion.

Yes or NO, all the same. The whole thing considered in these pairs of possibilities cancels/anuls each other and becomes nonsense. It is too little, too unsufficient to be further discussed.

You always mention Something Else as a third possibility, not yet speculated on. Do you have some ideas about this S.E.? That’s the most interesting question.

"I don’t think that everything in our world is an illusion of our mind (Maya) as the Indian philosophy says."

---What would be an example of a thing, in our world, that is not an illusion of our mind? That is, how could the mind create a thing that is not illusionary? Don't forget, a non-thing is converted into a thing through the workings of the mind.

Maybe I have expressed myself wrongly. On the one hand I have difficulties to write in English. On the other hand it seems that I have difficulties to follow advanced philosophical thinking.

In the course of my participation in the Sant Mat-group I got in contact with the teaching, that the material world as we know it is only an illusion. And is part of the negative power and should be overpowered/transcended.

The question is: whose illusion? The illusion of our human brains, of our mind? Or the illusion of the so called god?

As far as I can see (and maybe I am not able to see clearly) it can’t be the illusion of our brains/minds, since our brains are also part of the material world, and therefore part of the illusion. In that case: what or who is producing the illusion?

Your comments are just fine. In addition, your writings in English are very good.

Study how the 'illusion" word is being used here. I'm guessing, such illusion is the creation of mind or brain activity. The creation of such illusion, I don't see as a product of some sort of negative power. Negative power is relative to another persons positive power.

I reserve the right to be wrong. So, how does one overpower/transcend a negative power? Where is this negative/positive power being stored? If stored in the brain, then what part of the brain knows how do the overpowering?

The material world(the concept of) is in the workings of the brain. Take away all concepts of what materials are, then what do you have? A non-conceptual non-material no-thing-ness non-world. Pointing to that non-thing-ness could be Something Else.

Oh, and what does exceeding intellectual capacity mean? I'm just a pickup truck driver from Texas, now living in Las Vegas.

“The creation of such illusion, I don't see as a product of some sort of negative power....”

Nor do I. I didn’t want to say this. (but thanks, this is another point of view which demonstrates me the nonsense of the santmat-teaching)

What I tried to say is this: How can an illusion produce an illusion?
If the whole material world is an illusion, then also the brain is an illusion.
It can’t be an illusion of the brain if the brain itself is an illusion.
Whose illusion is it then?

I don’t know if my logic is somehow comprehensible.

“The material world (the concept of) is in the workings of the brain. Take away all concepts of what materials are, then what do you have? A non-conceptual non-material no-thing-ness non-world. Pointing to that non-thing-ness could be Something Else.”

Ok, here the same thing: the concept of the material world is in the workings of the brain - - and the brain itself is part of the materials. I would take myself/my brain away (and not only myself, everything), if I imagine a non-conceptual non-material no-thing-ness non-world. What is the result: there is nothing left, absolutely nothing.
But what I see - there is something. How can it be nothing if there is something?

That’s what I mean when I say it exceeds my intellectual capacity.

Ps: thx for telling that my writings are ok. Compiling a comment takes me a lot of time in which the dictionary is my best friend.

When it is said that the world is an illusion, what is really meant is that a world of discrete, inherently-existing, self-sustaining, independent things is an illusion - or more correctly, a delusion - such things cannot be found.

But of course brains and trees and mountains have an ontology - they 'exist' in some sense. We might say that they 'exist' as evolving, emerging, modulations of this great event that we call the cosmos. Carl Sagan famously said that if you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. And as you rightly indicate, for there to be a brain and its delusions, we first require this emergent event that we call the cosmos.

So what is the deepest nature of this energetic/mental phenomenon that is the 'stuff' of existence? No one really knows? Gurus and spiritual types don't know and scientists and philosophers don't know. So you are right to say that it exceeds your intellectual capacity - it exceeds ALL of our intellectual and cognitive capacities. In fact it is perfectly reasonable to reach a conclusion that reality holds secrets that are beyond (at least for now) the biological capabilities of the evolved chimps that we appear to be.

I would say, the brain/mind creates the illusion. If this is true, I really don't know how the brain does that. Does anyone absolutely know?

That said, we do live in an objective reality of material things. These things are conceptualized from non-things. The material world is real, and being such can be conceptualized as good, bad, etc.

Non-things still exist. Non-things are the non-conceptualized somethings, that you referenced.

You did mention,

"I would take myself/my brain away (and not only myself, everything), if I imagine a non-conceptual non-material no-thing-ness non-world. What is the result: there is nothing left, absolutely nothing."

---How would you take your self away? True, you can imagine such, but that is still conceptualizing. The non-conceptual non-material no-thing-ness non-world would not be nothing. Nothing is opposite of something, and another concept. Use the term, no-thing-ness, which really is another dualistic term too.

I was guessing, you meant by intellectual capacity, as the dualist wordage used to describe non-duality.

All I can say right now is that I have to reflect your comments in some quiet moments.

I find them difficult to understand. What you say impressionates me but at this point I think I am not able to comprehend, to reenact your views.
Maybe I have got a too big portion of the chimp's brain ;-)

What I meant before was that I cannot conceive a non-world if there IS a world in which I and all the others live in. It is a fact for me that there is an objective reality. I see no sense in such a conception of a non-world or the presumption that the world is an illusion.

What I can imagine very well is that we as humans are not aware of everything existing. That there are still things we don't see, we don't feel, we don't experience.

Did you mean this by saying: no-thing-ness non-world,
did you mean not yet experienced things,or better: aspects, not yet speculated on?
If not, what did you mean?

Google search

Click the "HinesSight" button and you can search my two weblogs: HinesSight and Church of the Churchless

WWW HinesSight

Teeny-tiny Collection Plate

Brian Hines: Return to the OneIf you'd like to support the Church's efforts in a small way, and also learn about a great Greek mystic philosopher (Plotinus) who wonderfully embodies our creedless creed, consider buying our unpastor's book, "Return to the One: Plotinus's Guide to God-Realization."